Watch Dogs Legion and Watch Dogs series

Oct 8, 2016 8:51:48 GMT Serza said:

It's Ubisoft. They have a history of not giving a single fuck.

I still don't see why. Also, Watch Dogs 2 seem to be different from its predecessor because of the criticisms and the feedback the latter recieved.

Oct 8, 2016 15:42:32 GMT Serza said:

Well, if you don't want to see it, I won't be forcing you... But look back a bit, would ya.

Argument: "Ubisoft does not care about fan feedback."

Counterargument: "Watch Dogs 2 seem to show that they've taken some of the first Watch Dogs's criticisms to heart."

Rebuttal: "You're just in denial."

Perhaps I'd find an actual rebuttal a more convincing argument than an ad hominem?

Oct 8, 2016 19:16:55 GMT Serza said:

Seen The Division? Rainbow Six? Far Cry? Assassin's Creed?

The first is a broken mess - more than six months after release, the game is dead and plain worthless.
The second is balanced based on a whim - who's crying more, seems like.
The third is basically just a copy paste scenario - a few things change, but you get the same old shit in a new look.
The fourth is basically beating a dead horse - and I hope I don't need to remind you that the golden age of AC ended with Revelations.

Need more?

See, that's an actual rebuttal because you're presenting cases to support your argument rather than presenting logical fallacies.

I haven't played or been interested in the Division, Rainbow Six, Far Cry and have not played the recent Assassin's Creed games. I should note that I don't see what's wrong with continuing a game series as long as people are still enjoying them like, say, people feeling that Syndicate was a worthwhile installment in the Assassin's Creed franchise and still enjoy said franchise then I see no reason for it to end.

None of that, however, deals with whether or not Watch Dog 2 is a case of Ubisoft ignoring feedback and criticisms. You can use the examples you mention to argue that Ubisoft seems to have established a habit of not caring and that therefore you consider it highly likely or are convinced that Watch Dogs 2 will be another such case.

I would, however, point to what is known about Watch Dogs 2 and what was the main complaints I've heard about Watch Dogs 1, namely, the story, the main character and a supposed graphical downgrade:

Story: The story of the game seems much more tied to aspects of hacking culture such as hacktivism and even how technology is a double-edged sword that can do harm as well as good. Technology and hacking seem intrinsically tied to the story whereas in the first game, the story could be moved out of the heavily technological setting which very few changes to it, gameplay not withstanding.

The Protagonist: Marcus seems a much more likable and enjoyable character as does his crew each of whom seem to have a character of their own whereas Aiden did not seem to have much depth to him and his characterization did not seem to extend beyond character type which led to him frequently, in my opinion, being overshadowed by the supporting cast such as T-Bone who felt like he did have depth and whose story did feel closely tied to the heavily technological setting. 

Graphics: I have a bad eye for these kinds of things, largely influenced by how I don't care about graphics for the most part unless they are phenomenally bad. I have not yet, however, heard about anything about a graphical downgrade being noticed with this game between E3 gameplay and, say, the demo.